From loads of research I did back in 2016 for a trip to Alaska, the best defense against any bear attack is supposedly bear spray but I will admit some real experts debate as do a whole cadre of armchair bear killers. Anyway, I and my son carried it in Alaska. Then again, I also carried a 44 magnum and a Remington 870 and my son had a 1911. We both also carried K-Bar Marine fighting knives (no I do not consider myself a knife fighter but I'll be damned if I do not have what I can carry and maybe use for survival in a tough spot). Sometimes my son carried the 870 and only I had the Ruger Redhawk. The 870 was loaded with alternating slugs and buckshot rounds. Never saw a bear where we were but then the salmon were not running yet as we went in May through early June but had we seen one at any distance instead of already ontop of me, I am quite confident I could have brought the 870, which I carried on a 3 point sling, into play. I have always been quite adept with the 870, carried one on operations for many years when a federal agent as my preferred long arm and our range master once told me he never saw anyone shoot one as swiftly while keeping the shots on target as did I. I just loved to shoot it. Cannot do it so much anymore thanks to Arthur I. Tis but still shoot it now and again. If we ever go to Alaska again, I hope to be able to afford the much higher rates for everything once the salmon are running in around mid June to early or mid July. Then, we'd likely see some bears, Brown or Black, and hopefully will not wind up as dinner.
Anyway, my point about the OP's trip is, besides bear spray, if you have one you may want to consider carrying a shotgun like an 870. I was assured by several locals in Alaska, including fish & wildlife type officials, an 870 would do the job nicely - much better than my Ruger Redhawk even with the very heavy rounds I had loaded into it. Another choice, if you have one could be a lver action in 45-70 Gov't. We encountered a few locals carrying Marlin rifles in 45-70. Lever action rifles chambered in that caliber seemed to big a big hit up that way at the time although I'd much prefer the 870. One other consideration, if I ever hike in big cat country, I would consider getting a face like mask to wear on the back of my head. A long time ago, I read a couple or few articles that explained how tiger attacks in India were greatly reduced when rural living folks starting doing that there. Tigers apparently prefer to attack their prey from the rear and evidently were confused by the masks. Not fool proof by a long shot but possibly an advantage making it worth looking silly.
Anyway, my point about the OP's trip is, besides bear spray, if you have one you may want to consider carrying a shotgun like an 870. I was assured by several locals in Alaska, including fish & wildlife type officials, an 870 would do the job nicely - much better than my Ruger Redhawk even with the very heavy rounds I had loaded into it. Another choice, if you have one could be a lver action in 45-70 Gov't. We encountered a few locals carrying Marlin rifles in 45-70. Lever action rifles chambered in that caliber seemed to big a big hit up that way at the time although I'd much prefer the 870. One other consideration, if I ever hike in big cat country, I would consider getting a face like mask to wear on the back of my head. A long time ago, I read a couple or few articles that explained how tiger attacks in India were greatly reduced when rural living folks starting doing that there. Tigers apparently prefer to attack their prey from the rear and evidently were confused by the masks. Not fool proof by a long shot but possibly an advantage making it worth looking silly.
.png)
